Kailash Wati Vs Ayodhya Parkash

Kailash Wati v.
Gandhian Parkash 1971 CLJ 109 (P & H)
Kailash Wati v. Ayodya Parkash 1971 CLJ 109 (P & H)
Kailash wati -Plaintiff
Ayodhya parkash -Respondent
Facts
The appellant Smt. Kaiashwati was married to respondent Ayodhya Parkash on 29

Jun 1964 at that time both of spouse were employed as village level teacher the
appellant at his parental village Bilqa and respondent at village Kut Isa Khan. After
marriage,the appellant kailashwati was transferred to the station of her husband’s
posting and all they stay together in matrimonial home for a period of 8-9 months.
After that, appellant again got herself transferred at his parental village Bilqa and
were she is residing with their parents against her wishes. Thereafter, a suit for
restitution of conjugal right under sec 9 of Hindu Marriage Act on 4 Nov 191 was
filed by respondent Ayodhya Parkash in trial court
Legal Issue
1. Whether the appellant has withdrawn from the society of her husband without
any reasonable excuse and against his wishes?
2. Whether consideration of employment constitute a reasonable ground for
withdrawl?
3. Whether husband has any superior right over wife to another determine the
location of matrimonial house or not?
4. Whether a husband who marries a woman engages in public or private service
impliedly give up his right to claim common matrimonial home with wife or not?
Argument by appellant
I. Appellant contended that at the time of marriage with his eyes open had
accepted her as a working wife and therefore she was under no obligation to
live with his husband because consideration of employment prevented him to
do so. She has never denied access to her husband as and when possible at her
place of posting at Bilqa where she was residing with her parents. So she never
referred to honour his matrimonial obligation.
II. It was also contended that although she may not be entitled to withdraw from
the matrimonial home at her own wish yet in present time the husband has no
superior right to determine the location of matrimonial home and wife was
equally entitled to do so. The wife has equal right to claims a matrimonial home
of her choice and ask the husband to live with her if she has superior financial
status than her husband.
1
Kailash Wati v. Gandhian Parkash 1971 CLJ 109 (P & H)
Argument by respondent
1. The respondent contended that the appellant has got herself transferred again
to his parental village bilqa and virtually since then has been residing their with
his parent against her wishes.
2. It was contended that his wife had unilaterly withdrawn from the matrimonial
home for 12 years of his life even when he is in a position to maintain his wife in
dignified comfort at his place of posting with his salary and other source. She
had denied him the society and comfort of conjugal life for this long period of
time without any reasonable excuse. Therefore, she insist that she should return
to live with him in the matrimonial home.
Decision of trial court

The trial court granted the decree of restitution of conjugal rights to the husband.
Aggrieved by this, wife Kailashwati filed an appeal before high court.
Decision of Punjab and Haryana high court

High Court held that whenever any working woman enter into bond of matrimony it
in her duty and obligation to live with her husband as a necessary incident of
marriage. Mere fact of 2 working spouse doesn’t entitle them to claim separate
residence.
It further held that husband is entitled by law to determined the location of
matrimonial home provided he acts in good faith.
The very idea of marriage involves a mutual obligation between parties to
live together as husband and wife and this legal acceptance. Therefore, this act on
the part of appellant can’t be deemed to be a reasonable excuse for the withdrawl
from society of her husband because the husband was willing and in position to
support and maintain her in dignified comfort with his salary and other source. So
that is unilateral withdrawl by the appellant wife against the wishes of her husband
from his society without any resaonable excuse.
Appeal is dismissed parties were left to bear their own cost.

Kailash Wati Vs Ayodhya Parkash

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Kailash Wati Vs Ayodhya Parkash

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Kailash Wati Vs Ayodhya Parkash

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Kailash Wati v.

Gandhian Parkash 1971 CLJ 109 (P & H)

Kailash Wati v. Ayodya Parkash 1971 CLJ 109 (P & H)

Kailash wati -Plaintiff

Ayodhya parkash -Respondent

The appellant Smt. Kaiashwati was married to respondent Ayodhya Parkash on 29

Decision of trial court

Decision of Punjab and Haryana high court

You might also like